BigMcK wrote:Like you, I have zero desire to experiment with drugs. But how many people are willing if they knew it wasn't likely to end in criminal problems?

If the goal is to legalize drugs to gain sales tax revenue, where do the proceeds go? Education of the dangers? Other government run social programs?

I think it's funny how everyone I talk with who is against legalizing drugs, says that they have no desire to use drugs but think that if they were to suddenly to become legal, people would suddenly start to use drugs. They say this like everyone in this country is stupid, that the government should hold their hand from cradle to grave, and that people actually care about the laws and follow them. People who are dumb enough to use them, will use them. People who are smart enough not to use them, aren't going to use them no matter if there are laws or not. If I want to commit suicide I'm not going to say, oh look the law says that I can't take my own life, I don't want to break the law so I'm going to keep living on. People own their bodies, not the government.

I would have the revenue go towards rehab and education. The drug war has failed miserably and helping people with addictions instead of throwing them in jail is the way to go. If you want proof that education works, just look at how cigarette usage is way down among the youth. Since elementary school I've been brainwashed into thinking that tobacco was the devil.

Create the demand for heavily addictive narcotics through legalization.

2. Supply ≠ demand. Just because something is legal to purchase and use something does not mean that anyone will want to buy it. Would you start using drugs just because they’re legal? I wouldn’t.

A little while ago, on this board, I made the comment that I didn't know anyone who didn't use drugs simply because they were illegal. There were a couple replies from people who said the illicit nature of pot was pretty much the sole reason they didn't smoke. I confess, that really surprised me. Maybe it's the nature of the different living locations, I don't know. But I can't think of a single person in my circle of friends who shy away from drug use because of the fear of getting caught. In fact, the opposite tends to be more prevalent..... the taboo element that ExPat cited being a major draw. Remove that taboo, and I'd wager you'd actually see a net decrease in the number of drug users over time.

And, as Mrs Tif once pointed out, one of the big problems with MJ being perceived as a gateway drug is that - by definition - you have to obtain your stash from an illegal drug dealer. One who probably either has other products on offer, or who pals around with folks who do, and might be looking to expand their customer base with the more expensive stuff. Chemically, there is nothing particularly addictive about pot (less than 10% of chronic users [double pun] develop any sort of dependency) and therefore there is no 'gate' to way. So there are other factors that contribute to people graduating from pot to bigger things.

(Tif = advocate of legalization of most drugs, and someone who has never even so much as smoked a cigarette before and has no desire whatsoever to try any drugs)

MRandall25 wrote:People busted for heroin, etc. are going to wonder why pot is legalized, but their drug isn't.

Pot simply isn't as addictive or as dangerous in its consequences as other drugs.... certainly not as addictive as alcohol or tobacco, and they've been legal for decades/centuries. People are more likely to become physically addicted to the habit of smoking every day, the same way that I think I'm physically addicted to the Internet.

BigMcK wrote:Drug charges alone, I would agree. However, drug charges are most often tied to other criminal offenses which are dropped in hopes that the person seeks assistance for their addiction. (my own personal belief)

It has been my (anecdotal) experience that the opposite is true; the drug charges are dropped (in exchange for therapy) while the other associated charges are prosecuted. Especially here in 'three strikes' Cali, and if the associated charges are for violent crimes.

MRandall25 wrote:People busted for heroin, etc. are going to wonder why pot is legalized, but their drug isn't.

Pot simply isn't as addictive or as dangerous in its consequences as other drugs.... certainly not as addictive as alcohol or tobacco, and they've been legal for decades/centuries. People are more likely to become physically addicted to the habit of smoking every day, the same way that I think I'm physically addicted to the Internet.

The only really negitives of pot that I see is that it can trigger psychosis and depression. Probably cancer too. Any smoke in the lungs is probably not good for you.

If your point is that drugs can be bad for people I don't see anyone arguing that.

Yeah, not sure the point there BMK. Are you suggesting that Lynott would have died quicker if drugs were legal? People will OD on drugs whethor they are legal or not. It's a destructive behavior that has little to do with legality.

tifosi77 wrote:A little while ago, on this board, I made the comment that I didn't know anyone who didn't use drugs simply because they were illegal. There were a couple replies from people who said the illicit nature of pot was pretty much the sole reason they didn't smoke. I confess, that really surprised me. Maybe it's the nature of the different living locations, I don't know. But I can't think of a single person in my circle of friends who shy away from drug use because of the fear of getting caught. In fact, the opposite tends to be more prevalent..... the taboo element that ExPat cited being a major draw. Remove that taboo, and I'd wager you'd actually see a net decrease in the number of drug users over time.

Obviously, from you citing my earlier comment, I agree with you. However, *I* am one of those people who don't use pot, but who would use it if it were legal.

I haven't smoked pot since the 80's. However, I do enjoy my beer. I probably drink more beer than I should, and I worry about what it's doing to my liver over time (particularly here as I get into the 'back half' of my 50's when, with each passing year, my chances of being prescribed a maintaince drug are increased) (I have a real concern about the combination of many pharmacueticals when taken with frequent alcohol comsumption).

I know marijuana is not without it's own issues (For instance, Bob Marleys brain cancer was most likely due in large part to his constantly stoned state). But I'd rather take my chances on what Pot does (in moderation), than what alcohol does.

In addition, I personally believe that the personality changes that occur with pot use are probably more socially acceptable than the changes that occur when one is drunk.

Lastly, I haven't gotten behind the wheel of a vehicle, while intoxicated, in years, but I'd rather share the road with someone high on pot than with someone who's drunk. (Not that either should be tolerated, but the reality is that people imbibe and drive)

MRandall25 wrote:People busted for heroin, etc. are going to wonder why pot is legalized, but their drug isn't.

Pot simply isn't as addictive or as dangerous in its consequences as other drugs.... certainly not as addictive as alcohol or tobacco, and they've been legal for decades/centuries. People are more likely to become physically addicted to the habit of smoking every day, the same way that I think I'm physically addicted to the Internet.

The only really negitives of pot that I see is that it can trigger psychosis and depression. Probably cancer too. Any smoke in the lungs is probably not good for you.

MRandall25 wrote:People busted for heroin, etc. are going to wonder why pot is legalized, but their drug isn't.

Pot simply isn't as addictive or as dangerous in its consequences as other drugs.... certainly not as addictive as alcohol or tobacco, and they've been legal for decades/centuries. People are more likely to become physically addicted to the habit of smoking every day, the same way that I think I'm physically addicted to the Internet.

The only really negitives of pot that I see is that it can trigger psychosis and depression. Probably cancer too. Any smoke in the lungs is probably not good for you.

What about weight gain and sloth?

Well, now that hostess is 'toast'. You'd have to find another way to defeat the munchies

And here I thought most impressive part of that post was that I still remember the name of my professor after 30 years.

EPP and I roamed the Pitt campus at the same time period.

A friend of mine who lived in the towers claimed that he was on an elevator one night with Tony Dorsett when the elevator accidentally stopped between floors and the doors opened up. Tony tried to walk out and walked into a concrete wall.

columbia wrote:You can mark me down for if it were legal.(And that would probably just be a few times a month.)

The risk of being arrested is enough to keep me away from it....I've avoided jail this long, so no need to tempt fate.

i would partake if it were legal. being arrested would be fairly inconvenient right now. plus, interacting with drug dealers isn't really something i would be comfortable with.

effectively, i don't think pot is much different than alcohol. the big difference is that with pot, intoxication doesn't come with feeling like charcoal afterwards. and as someone who hates hangovers, that is appealing to me.

i think legalization increases drug use, but not necessarily drug ABUSE. people who are willing to wreck their own lives will figure out a way to do it with or without legal drugs.

columbia wrote:You can mark me down for if it were legal.(And that would probably just be a few times a month.)

The risk of being arrested is enough to keep me away from it....I've avoided jail this long, so no need to tempt fate.

i would partake if it were legal. being arrested would be fairly inconvenient right now. plus, interacting with drug dealers isn't really something i would be comfortable with.

effectively, i don't think pot is much different than alcohol. the big difference is that with pot, intoxication doesn't come with feeling like charcoal afterwards. and as someone who hates hangovers, that is appealing to me.

i think legalization increases drug use, but not necessarily drug ABUSE. people who are willing to wreck their own lives will figure out a way to do it with or without legal drugs.

And here I thought most impressive part of that post was that I still remember the name of my professor after 30 years.

EPP and I roamed the Pitt campus at the same time period.

A friend of mine who lived in the towers claimed that he was on an elevator one night with Tony Dorsett when the elevator accidentally stopped between floors and the doors opened up. Tony tried to walk out and walked into a concrete wall.

I was in the Evening School of General Studies though... On the GI bill. At the time I worked fulltime for Mellon Bank as a programmer.

shmenguin wrote:i think legalization increases drug use, but not necessarily drug ABUSE. people who are willing to wreck their own lives will figure out a way to do it with or without legal drugs.

That seems like the most realistic scenario.

but to be clear, i don't believe in the legalization of all drugs. i think pot is incredibly benign compared to cocaine, heroin, meth, etc and deserves special consideration. there are cases to be made for all of it to be legal, but i haven't been convinced.